Ming on the IV board has suggested that the judge will delay his final judgment until after the Cisco trial.
While I give some consideration to this suggestion, the judge has to be very careful not to cross-reference the trials. Different evidence, different jury and most particularly different products must remain and be treated differently.
What a delay would do, if VHC prevails, would be to give Judge Davis more confidence in closing the book on Apple.
I personally don't think he will wait - but a more cautious and conservative judge probably would.
On a lighter vein, Mr. Ming in the process of giving an English lesson made a boo-boo. He uses "irregardless" incorectly. "Irregardless" is most probably a combination of "regardless" and " irrespective".
You can see the word itself is a doublee negative with "irr" meaning "not" and "less" meaning "not".
Anyway I'm mad at that guy over there as it take a few moments to read his posts but I have to spend much more time referencing the dictionary.
I've had several lawyers familiar with VHC's situation tell me that HJD won't "wait" for the Cisco trial to issue his judgement. They did point out that Fed judges are extremely busy people and his schedule may not allow for a judgement before Cisco, but that would be the reason for the delay, schedule and not judicial.
That being said the whole reason for trying Apple first and splitting out the rest of the defendants was for this trial to be the "bellwhether". That makes it sound to me like he originally expected that he would produce a judgement before the next trial.